2018-2019 Season - New rules

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

How it's being done all along has nothing to do with what improvements people wanted to see with these new proposals, or if what has been done all along made sense in the first place, but let me focus on this.

Suppose a skater does a 3Lz, but is a flutzer. Their technique in one competition is such that by the time they pick in, there is no counter-rotation at all, and the skater is on a moderate inside-edge. This jump now looks like a 3F. They under rotate and fall.

Should this skater be marked as 3Lze< (fall), or a 3F< (fall)?

If there's no preceding outside edge entry with counter-rotation, and the skater is taking off their it's a 3F attempt.

But back to the scenario I showed with Javier's bailed 3F: I was asking, since you and others think GOE should be deducted based on the intended jump, shouldn't Javier's 3F<< have been deducted points using the GOE scaling of a 3F (-2.1 points lost) instead of a 2F (0.9 points lost), since the intended jump was obviously a 3F?

Here's another example: Hanyu's 4T<< at Autumn Classic International:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYx2WzIXvZ8#t=4m2s
https://skatecanada.ca/results/2017-ACI/CSCAN2017_SeniorMen_FS_Scores.pdf (see page 3)

Clearly, he intended to do a 4T, but downgraded it. However, the GOE deduction had the scaling of a 3T (-1.82 points were deducted) instead of using the scaling of his intended jump of a 4T (something like -3.46 points). So, like Javier, do you think he have been deducted based on the GOE scaling of his INTENDED jump, the 4T?

 

[BillNeal]

Here's my understanding (percentages of BV), based on falls getting -5 GOE:

< and e with fall= 0.6 * 0.5 = 30%

< or e with fall = 0.75 * 0.5 = 37.5%

Fall on fully rotated jump = 50%

< and e (0 GOE) = 60%

< or e (0 GOE) = 75%

Perfect jump = 150%

In the case of fall on 4F, 4F< or e, 4F< and e = 5.5 , 4.13 (4.12 if using table) , 3.3. Difference between fall on 4F vs 4F< is 1.37.

Also, note that 4F with fall is only slightly higher than 3F with 0 GOE.

 

[cohen-esque]

I do think we need to consider what’s actually feasible within the rules, regardless of whether that’s always the thing we most like to see.

Personally, I disagree that “<“ and “e” should even have a GOE penalty, since it seems like double jeopardy to punish someone for badly executing a jump you aren’t actually giving them full credit for executing anyway.

But if we take a GOE penalty, it needs to be scaled down to be workable. What about a 4Lze<< (fall)? If we take the full -5.75 for a 4Lz, they’ll go negative, and that’s without a fall penalty. Do we want negative values to be possible? Personally, I don’t; I think it could severely discourage skaters at all levels from adding difficulty.

The next thing, then, is to go for a value that penalizes the 4Lze<< (which mind you, has already been penalized in about 8 points of base value.) In this case, equal to the 3Lze< scale that exists precisely for this reason.

I still wish the ISU had avoided this whole thing by making all GOEs just a flat 10% of the base value, no matter the value and no matte what calls.

 

[chopinskate]

Personally, I disagree that “<“ and “e” should even have a GOE penalty, since it seems like double jeopardy to punish someone for badly executing a jump you aren’t actually giving them full credit for executing anyway.

Completely discarding what has been done, and what might have been better within the rules proposed, I agree. A jump with < or e might still have good flow-out, or good height and distance. They wouldn't be getting +5s anyway for poor take-off, and poor landing, but they could still get +2s.


And, yes, 10% increments flat-out was what I'd hoped for as well.

 

[FreyaZz]

Holy anti-Americanism, Batman. Would you have appreciated people saying, "Give Yuzu the 2018 gold medal in advance and get Japan off our freaking backs that way"? Is it nice to say, "Give Trusova the 2022 gold medal and get Russia off our backs?"

Other skaters are perfectly welcome to learn different/harder quads, and get them consistent, between now and 2022.

It's not Chen's fault that he's currently able to reliably execute jumps, especially the hardest ones like 4F and 4Z, while others aren't. And the rules don't benefit him that much given that now more points are being given for GOE, which isn't usually his strong suit.

Judges gave him easy GOE though? He is well known of being able to jump many type of quads but the quality is so-so, yet when you see the score sheet and GOE you wouldn't think so. All hail candies!!

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Judges gave him easy GOE though? He is well known of being able to jump many type of quads but the quality is so-so, yet when you see the score sheet and GOE you wouldn't think so. All hail candies!!

I wouldn't say the GOE is outrageous. The quads he does usually have good run out and look effortless. The height is good. He gets relatively fewer +3s compared to some of the other guys - some of who get +3s for jumps that definitely don't deserve it, and the judges were not overly generous in his Worlds FS even though they could have been given he was miles above the rest and skated at the end.

Although sometimes I wish he'd throw in more transitions just to shut the hecklers up. He's clearly capable of producing quads out of nothingness so adding a couple entry steps and throwing an exit transition after every pass would help him maximize GOE more. That's what's holding back his marks but I think this -5 to +5 gradation will incentivize him to add more features to his jumps.

It's amazing to think that he got only a couple +3s at Worlds and still has the highest TES ever - and with minor errors too! He could have pulled 130+ TES had he gone entirely clean at Worlds.

 

[TallyT]

100%.

Perhaps they meant "Nathan rules!"

Except that from what I can tell from all the conflicting opinions, maths-crunching, interpretations, ideas etc etc etc, we won't have the foggiest idea WHO will rule until way into the next season.....

Which of the skaters/coaches majored in higher mathematics? They will rule, most likely.

 

[moriel]

Except that from what I can tell from all the conflicting opinions, maths-crunching, interpretations, ideas etc etc etc, we won't have the foggiest idea WHO will rule until way into the next season.....

Which of the skaters/coaches majored in higher mathematics? They will rule, most likely.

considering the level of this, whoever manages to do simple sum, multiplication and division is already much above the average level.
sorry still trying to digest the rules.

 

[CanadianSkaterGuy]

Except that from what I can tell from all the conflicting opinions, maths-crunching, interpretations, ideas etc etc etc, we won't have the foggiest idea WHO will rule until way into the next season.....

Which of the skaters/coaches majored in higher mathematics? They will rule, most likely.

Well it will be hard to say who will rule next season, but Nathan absolutely ruled this season.

Landed the full set of quads (other than the axel), which no other man has done.

The Olympics was the big disappointment but he still did a five, almost six, quad freeskate in the Olympics, highest TES ever in a FS, comfortably winning the FS over the three medalists.

Youngest World Champion since 2001, and winning by a country mile (again with almost 6 quads). Youngest US champ since 1966.

He's now ranked 1st in the World. And he just finished his second senior season!

Lol under the quad rules he just needs to bring the 4L back and he's good to go. He can still do a 5-quad FS. In fact now he's the only one who can do a 5-quad program.

Will be interesting though with Yuzuru and recovered Shoma. Jin could make a splash too with his different quads but like Chen he needs to increase GOE (and Jin also needs to get better programs).

 

[4everchan]

i am sad for pairs throws.... that's all i am going to say

 

[charlotte14]

i am sad for pairs throws.... that's all i am going to say

I want less lift, more side by side jumps and another twist but they do not listen to me. I still think 1 lift is enough seriously. I want more skating and element in which both sides work together.

 

[4everchan]

I want less lift, more side by side jumps and another twist but they do not listen to me. I still think 1 lift is enough seriously. I want more skating and element in which both sides work together.

more twists? why? one twist is enough. and I like the different lifts, so I will disagree here. Each one has a different entrance and features. Perhaps they could remove a lift by making one type mandatory in the SP every year and that lift wouldn't be featured in the LP... but I think it's important to keep all these lifts.

Also, if you think the lady just does nothing during a lift, well that's not true. She has to maintain balance, change position, be extremely precise for every move made as anything different from training can mean a fall. Lifts are really what makes pair skating pairs... when both partner work together but differently.

I am trying to imagine the kind of pair skating you would like to see... more sbs jumps, more twist?? less lifts... and it makes me think about synchronized diving perhaps that is a sport you should watch. (I say this with humour of course)

 

[Ic3Rabbit]

Yes, give me MORE pairs lifts! I'm with 4EC on this one.

 

[charlotte14]

more twists? why? one twist is enough. and I like the different lifts, so I will disagree here. Each one has a different entrance and features. Perhaps they could remove a lift by making one type mandatory in the SP every year and that lift wouldn't be featured in the LP... but I think it's important to keep all these lifts.

Also, if you think the lady just does nothing during a lift, well that's not true. She has to maintain balance, change position, be extremely precise for every move make as anything different from training can mean a fall. Lifts are really what makes pair skating pairs... when both partner work together but differently.

I am trying to imagine the kind of pair skating you would like to see... more sbs jumps, more twist?? less lifts... and it makes me think about synchronize diving perhaps that is a sport you should watch. (I say this with humour of course)

I think 1 lift in SP and 2 Lifts in LP are ok. I just prefer more attention on steps and side by side elements.

 

[lavoix]

Hang on I don't get it....

What are the main changes in pairs??

Are these decisions final?

 

[4everchan]

i am just referring to the base value of throws that is pretty much making a th3loop just as potent as a th3a.... forget the quads... nobody will ever attempt them ...

i don't know anything about elements kept or dumped.. i just saw a table with BV... that's why i said I would only talk about that.... because i haven't read enough to know anything more than the sacrilege done in lowering all lifts BV to bring them closer and closer to the old fashioned th3loop and th3sal... hello 1990 again !

 

[charlotte14]

Hang on I don't get it....

What are the main changes in pairs??

Are these decisions final?

Yes. They will just debate over the proposals. Not the new scale of value and GOE.

 

[xeyra]

Yes, but you can get +3 without checking any of the above. There are still 3 other bullet points available.

Kara said she was a fan of "having to hit the requirement of a jump being high and pretty to look at before getting GOE points on other things like tanos or hitting the music," which implies that if a jump is not high and pretty look at it can't get any positive GOE at all. That is not the case.

We might be seeing a lot of +3 jumps of differing qualities, then. Especially since judges might be weary of giving 4 or 5s in the beginning (though, who knows).

 

[yume]

Point being: reducing GOE based on the intended jump instead of the executed jump is ludicrous. A 4T and a 4T< are two differently executed jumps, and should be treated as such. They are worth different values, so the deduction (50% off for a fall, whatever the jump maybe), should be different for each jump. I get some people are super salty that this will benefit skaters who tend to UR, but this is how their UR jumps should have been scored all along, IMO.


ISU way:
3A fall = 4.00 points (50% deducted from the value of a 3A)
3A< fall = 3.00 points (50% deducted from the value of a 3A<)

Your way:
3A fall = 4.00 points (50% deducted from the value of a 3A)
3A< fall = 2.00 points (66% deducted from the value of a 3A<, with the -4.00 deduction)

You're basically saying that skaters who land underrotated jumps should get more points than those who land fully rotated jumps.........and you think that it's fair. I don't get it.

 

[schizoanalyst]

The differential between a 4Lz and 4A is 1 point. The differential between a 3Lz and 3A is 2.1 points. I'm curious why the ISU considers the 3A apparently so much more challenging to the other triples versus the 4A to the quads.

Or maybe they didn't think any of this through and just through some junk together until enough people said - "fine whatever I'm starving, let's just leave."